For all the buzz that Republican heavyweight Jim Baker has generated with his public talk about an alternative to the “stay-the-course’’ or “cut-and-run’’ approaches to the war in Iraq, it will be some time before the bipartisan Iraq Study Group which Baker co-chairs will offer any glimpse at any alternative course of action.

And the White House, which insists that the president will not “outsource’’ his duties as commander-in-chief, is reserving the right to shelve whatever Baker and Co. come up with.

The 10-member Iraq Study Group, commissioned by Congress with five Republicans and five Democrats, will not produce a report until after Election Day. After interviewing hundreds of officials and experts, the commission is only now asking its staff to start drafting a report And it’s premature to presuppose what the commission might say, Baker’s fellow co-chairman says, because the commission hasn’t made up its own collective mind yet.

“It is correct to say that we, at this point, the study group, have not ruled anything in or anything out,’’ said Lee Hamilton, former longtime Democratic congressman from Indiana, who serves as co-chairman of the group and also served as vice-chairman of the 9/11 Commission, in an interview with the Tribune. “Any speculation about what the report contains is unfounded, because we have not had the discussion of the study group yet… The group itself has not met to discuss recommendations.’’

Hear this about the report, though, from co-chairman Hamilton, pictured to the right: “We will write our own report. It’s not going to be written by the White House. It’s not going to be written by the Congress.’’

Yet its advice may not be followed by the White House, press secretary Tony Snow suggested at his Friday press briefing.

“We're not trying to outsource the president's job as commander-in-chief,’’ Snow said. “The president continues to receive information and opinions from a wide variety of sources…

“I think there's an assumption that this is an outfit that, when they're finished, will present something, the president will duly follow its course,'' Snow said. "Maybe he will, maybe he won't, but he'll do it on the basis of his judgment.’’

Now, the White House isn’t about to tear up the work of the Jim Baker who ran the campaigns of the president’s father and who helped rescue the president from the 2000 election debacle in Florida. But the White House also has made a point of noting that this report will not simply be: 'Memo to Bush, from Baker.' It’s the work of Republicans, and Democrats.

“The Iraq Study Group was created pursuant to an act of Congress, and certainly we'll want to hear what the Democrats and Republicans on the bipartisan panel have to say,’’ Snow said. “But the president also listens to a lot of other voices, and he's going to do what he thinks best pursues the aim that we have always said we want to achieve, which is a democratic Iraq, an ally in the war on terror, that is able to sustain, govern and defend itself.’’

If those don’t sound like the words of an administration eager to change course, there's nothing to say the commission will chart a distinctly new course. For his part, Hamilton is saying nothing of where they might be headed - and suggests that Baker hasn’t really revealed much either.

“I think what Jim said was that there are options other than cut and run and staying the course,’’ he said. “And if you look carefully at his statement it was simply a statement of fact. He was not advocating anything… He was saying there are other options, and that is correct. He and I can’t walk out the door without people giving us recommendations.’’

Without tipping his hand, however, Hamilton hopes for a report worth reading:

“Our approach is to try to be forward-looking and progressive… We will offer some recommendations to move forward,'' he said. "We will do our best to achieve a consensus among the group… So far, we have proceeded on a very bipartisan and collegial basis…. We are doing our level beset to try to figure out what’s good for the country.’’

Comments

The Bushie's are already telling the world that they're not following anyone's advice.

After Nov.7,they won't have a lot of choices,the Dem Congress will take over.

And after a few investigations,the Bushie's will be like little pussycats.

Posted by: Raving Loon | Oct 14, 2006 8:44:20 AM&nbsp

“We're not trying to outsource the president's job as commander-in-chief,’’ Snow said. “The president continues to receive information and opinions from a wide variety of sources…

Rove and Cheney come to mind?

Posted by: Rory M | Oct 14, 2006 9:07:50 AM&nbsp

Of course Bush won't follow the advice.

That idiot's going to stay in Iraq if he has to kill every US soldier and every Iraqi citizen to do it--and it still won't save that country.

Maybe the next president can use the plan, though.

(By the way: Loved the Tribune editorial this week against splitting Iraq up and saying Iraq will eventually be a "bulwark" for democracy in the region. I guess someone in Tribune Tower has been drinking that Neocon Kool Aid.)

Posted by: tom | Oct 14, 2006 9:30:23 AM&nbsp

“I think there's an assumption that this is an outfit that... will present something, the president will duly follow its course,'' Snow said. "Maybe he will, maybe he won't, but he'll do it on the basis of his judgment.’’

An understandable position. It's exactly what Snow HAD to say for the Administration to save some face.

However, we can expect to see a change of strategy from this. Or maybe it would be more acurate to say we can FINALLY expect to see a strategy. Up till now I haven't seen one.

Posted by: Juanito | Oct 14, 2006 9:32:32 AM&nbsp

Juan,the window has long ago closed on a "strategy".You and I have discussed what should have been done as far as troop levels and true commitment to a "just"war.

The American people are ready to move on,accept that this invasion was a dismal failure.

When you lose the confidence of the American people,you've lost the war.

You may not want accept it,but many Dems have presented a strategy,and many Repubs are ready to accept it.Even you "Independents"

The current admin will just try to play out the final (2) years and dump onto the next admin.

This is how it will play out.

Posted by: Raving Loon | Oct 14, 2006 10:09:09 AM&nbsp

There seem to be bad choices in Iraq or really bad choices. What would I do?

2. Send the Iraq government a clear message. Get a handle on this war or else....

3. (The else...) If 'we' want to win, then we do what it takes to win. 140,000 (or so) troops aren't going to do it. If it's sooooo important as Bush says it is, then we start the draft and take over cities and providences 1 by 1. Do everything we can to make it safe, then hand it back to Iraq. The point is, we either get out or we win, PERIOD.

I don't like the idea of staying, but we broke it, we fix it. Plus, I don't like the thought of militant groups using Iraq as they see fit.

It may not be the best plan, but it is a plan. Something I haven't seen yet.

Posted by: InTheMiddle | Oct 14, 2006 11:09:30 AM&nbsp

what i don't understand about bush is that he wants a solution but still wont talk with his enemies.when u can get solution from them then why not take a little bit of advantage from them.i am sure it is worth doing.

Posted by: krose asia | Oct 14, 2006 12:41:02 PM&nbsp

Fellow Optimists:
For a bracing dose of reality, go to the website of the United States Institute for Peace which seems to be the facilitator for the Baker "Iraq Study Group"..... take a look at the makeup of the staff of experts, the so called "working groups". For example consider the 12 member group on (Iraq) Economy and Reconstruction. Here we have two people from Citigroup, one each from Bechtel, Rand Corp., National Defense University, and Brookings Institute, plus three members representing organizations with "Energy" in their titles. (one, an Arab who might be on the low end of a few 11-1 votes) Cheers....this parade has just been rained out.

Posted by: Franklin E Schroeter | Oct 14, 2006 3:15:43 PM&nbsp

This is off the subject but I want to bring it to peoples attention.

The Cheerleader in Chief,and his thug Secret Service guys detained a 14 yr old high school freshman girl for making threats against Dubya on her MySpace site. HaHaHaHaHaHaHa!!!!!

I like her thinking,but I want to see W.,Dark Cheney,and Turdblossom Rove serving a long prison sentence for all the people who have died as a direct result of their lying.

Silverspoon George has never had to pay consequences for his actions during his entire "silverspoon fed" life.

I want them to be worried about big "bubba" in the next jail cell down from them.

Only then will the soldiers who have died in Iraq,and the Iraqi citizens whom also have payed the ultimate price,will have do justice.

Posted by: John E. | Oct 14, 2006 3:39:37 PM&nbsp

krose asia,

1st of all... who do you talk to? What do you think 'their' solution is?

I am specically talking the situation in Iraq, there is a much bigger issue here.

Are you suggesting we talk things over and everything will be ok?

If that's the case, I guess all we have to do is to say we'll leave Iraq and in return they promise no more violence.

Do you think that will work?

Posted by: InTheMiddle | Oct 14, 2006 4:34:52 PM&nbsp

tom,

Yes, I'm afraid you are correct.
He will not change course in Iraq. Period.
It's for his successor to solve this dilemma.

But take heart America! You would rather 'have a beer' with 'W" than Kerry!!

Posted by: C.Morris | Oct 14, 2006 5:47:32 PM&nbsp

I think you all should read this blog. It tell you everything you need to know on how Republicans support the troops. Then maybe just maybe you see why I am so angry at certain people who just don't get it here.

How do you win a war based on lies, or, if you're very optimistic, "false intelligence"? The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are lost. We nedd to accept these facts and withdraw. Now.

Posted by: Michael | Oct 14, 2006 9:17:26 PM&nbsp

For all you defenders of the current administration - Bill, JohnD and JD - I'd like to see your comments on these as related from Dale's post and link:

In a time of WAR,

1. He opposed new tax provisions that would have helped military homeowners, reservists who had traveled long distances for training, and parents deployed in combat zones.

2. His 2005 Budget Proposal cut veterans' health care.

3. He opposed full health benefits for reservists and guardsmen serving in Iraq and Afghanastan.

4. He supported closing Walter Reed Army Hospital.

5. He supported closing seven VA hospitals.

6. He opposed increasing our veterans' health care benefits by $1B.

7. He proposed doubling the cost of prescription drugs for veterans.

8. He proposed cutting our troops' combat pay by 30%.

9. He proposed cutting assistance to our troops' families by 60%.

10. He opposed an amendment to the 2005 Bankruptcy bill that would have exempted military personnel returning from a combat zone from the fees for the credit counseling required by the bill.

11. He opposed an amendment to the 2005 Supplemental Defense Authorization bill that would have added $1.9B to the VA system. (the system ran out of money in June of 2005; Congress had to pass an emergency spending authorization for the system to remain open)

12. He instituted "Stop-Loss," preventing troops whose enlistments had run out from leaving the military. (this amounts to a "back-door-draft" and undermines the notion of an all-volunteer military).

13. Over 2 years into the war, the Bush Administration had still not provided proper armor for the vehicles used by our troops, forcing our troops to rummage through junkyards looking for sheets of metal they could bolt to the outside of their vehicles.

14. He cut funding for VA staff that evaluate health care and disability benefits claims at a time when the number of these claims were rising dramaticlly due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanastan, creating a backlong that forces our veterans to waits month---or, in some cases, years---before those claims are resolved.

15. Under President Bush, more and more of the families of our Reservists and National Guard are having to declare bankruptcy as a result of their service to our country.

16. Under President Bush, wounded soldiers are charged for their meals while they recover from their injuries in military hospitals.

17. Under President Bush, the final paychecks sent to the families of our soldiers killed in combat are docked for the number of days the soldier was dead.

18. The Pentagon has identified over 330 troops hit with military debts after being wounded in combat in Iraq and Afghanastan. This "financial friendly fire," instituted under President Bush, includes being charged for equipment (Kevlar helmets, rucksacks, etc.) not properly accounted for after their battlefield injuries, being given unreasonably short notice on having to return large lump sums of "combat pay" inadvertently paid to them while they were recovering in military hospitals (and were therefore no longer in a "combat zone), etc. Many wounded troops have even been aggressively hounded by collection agencies while learning to live without an arm or leg, and now have derogatory information on their credit reports.

19. In October of 2005, or about two and one-half years into the Iraq war, the Bush Administration finally committed to reimbursing troops for body armor they (or their families) had purchased on their own---armor that should have been provided to them by the military in the first place, but....

20. In January 2006, a secret Marine Corps report determined that 80% of the Marines killed in Iraq and Afghanastan between April of 2004 and June of 2005 could have survived if their body armor was more effective. Some troops have complained about the body armor issued by the military, the "Interceptor OTV" system, arguing that it limits mobility and has gaps in critical areas. Many have opted to use their own money (about $6,000) to purchase a different brand of body armor, Pinnacle's "Dragon Skin," which they consider to be far superior in both ballistic protection and in mobility. However, the Bush Administration has actually threatened our troops that if they are killed in battle while wearing any body armor other than the "Interceptor OTV" body armor issued by the military, their families "could" lose the $400,000 death benefit they would normally be entitled to.

Posted by: Jack | Oct 14, 2006 9:37:24 PM&nbsp

Thanks for the info, Dale. Bush and everyone who voted for him has created a huge disaster. Now they say the Dem's do not have an answer; but since when has anyone really listened to them.

John Kerry had an answer, John Murtha had an answer. Get Real America....

Shame on you for what you have done to our troops.

Posted by: Linda | Oct 14, 2006 9:53:17 PM&nbsp

There is no way the presence in Iraq can be continued when the population there loathes occupation forces.

A majority of shiites want them out, and sunnis never wanted them there at all. over 60% of the population approves of attacks against occupation forces.

With some 50 US servicepersonnel killed in Iraq already this month - more than 3 and a half years after the initial invasion - the American people would have to be declared insane to retain Republican lawmaker rule at the congressional November elections which basically says maintain the present course... to an end that is undetermined and has never been planned. To a course which has been botched and lined with scandal, hypocrisy, arrogance, stupidity and double standards at every step along the way.

What is the point of staying the present course there until everyone who hates the US is dead?

Asylum should be offered to those who wish to leave the country - at the expense of the BA & its financiers - and basically anyone who has profiteered from the war. There are many Iraqi's who would like to start a new life abroad, and also many who would never leave their sacred homeland - at least the opportunity will have been provided to them.

A 6 month timetable should be given for the useage of Western forces so that those who want their country to work know exactly what it is that they have to work with - rather than an open ended commitment which only exacerbates violence.

Forces should then be redeployed to protect government offices and key installations, with the majority sent to border regions to monitor what goes in and out of the country.

Examples through prosecution must be made of political leaders and advisers who have acted so irresponsibly and created this inexcusable mess to help unite many different peoples in the future and bring some accountability to a heavily divided world which in essence is being held hostage to the whims of an inept and foolish self-righteous administration that has lost sight of the bigger picture and is completely out of touch with reality, and control.

Posted by: Jos | Oct 15, 2006 5:50:13 AM&nbsp

Bush is like the the lost husband on vacation with his family. He refuses to change direction because he thinks it will show him as a weak dad who dosen't know what he is doing. What he dosen't realize is that it is the wise man who can determine another path if the one he begins down fails to reach his destination.

Posted by: Mr. P | Oct 15, 2006 7:16:28 AM&nbsp

Obviously, the lying Bush gang, and all his oil buddies, are content to continue to flush money and blood down the drain, as fast as possible, forever. Get used to it. However, can't we please, NOT ELECT ANOTHER TRESPASSING WARMONGER NEXT TIME? We need someone who is concerned about business, at home, not shooting up and lording over the world.

Posted by: Phil | Oct 15, 2006 11:52:00 AM&nbsp

Are they waiting for local security forces to be in place? Talk about ignorance. What loyalty can these members bring to the table, when not a one of them has not been a victim or a witness of our brutaliies and barbarities against him and his people, when not a one of them had ever lifted a finger or associated himself wth anyone inimical to us? Every dawn brings new hatred against the illegal invader, making more bitter his humiliation,and strengthening his determination of changing his appearance as a daytime uniformed stooge in our pay to a camouflaged insurgent at night. Let's take our beating and get out. The rest is conversation, " stay the course", and "war on terror".

Posted by: Louis Miccio | Oct 15, 2006 12:51:00 PM&nbsp

In my corner of the world, I grew up poor, a child of two foreign born parents, both of which never went to college and who trekked through life working meaningless jobs dominated by white males in the 60's, which did not offer much hope for my father who is black and served in the Black Army of WWII, can you remember that America?
So you can imagine how I would feel growing in up in this environment, where we as "colored folk" had to march and fight our own American brother to a near Civil War (opps we did that too) to sit on a damn bus or eat at the same counter with you’ all.

So fast forward 40 years; I've grown up served in the military, obtained an advanced college degree and in the process of obtaining a doctorate degree, so if I make any statements that you can't perceive take a minute and walk in my shoes, it usually changes ones perspective. Perspective rules in America, despite facts to the contrary.

I preface all this to plead my opening statement; how noxious of the American physic to determine in its brand of “Democracy” is worthy of extrapolation across the world. Now hang on with me and don’t get lost yet. Us who have a flawed concept of what Democracy is and how to practice it, i.e., Bush’s winning the 2000 election by a vote of the Supreme Court, Jim Crows laws, the Missouri Compromise, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Dredd Scott decision, Jack Abramhoff, Richard Nixon, Iran-Contra Weapons sales, you get it; yet we’re suppose to go over there to Iraq and go to Pre-Emptive War because Saddam/America is/has/wants, a) WMD’s, b) a bad man, c) killed his countrymen, d) a partner/helper/abider/know about/should of known about/read a book about a terrorist group, e) to liberate the Iraq people and be greeted as liberators, f) to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqis’, g) tried to kill my daddy, h) mobil chemical weapons labs, i) as Condi put it we can’t wait for, “the mushroom cloud” (the ol imminent fear theory), j) to spread the Fires of Freedom (an unquantifiable concept), k) to make the World Safer (as measured against an Unsafer World), l) and the latest before the Nov, 7 election, to fight them there so we don’t fight them here (an open end approach).

Bush may have a MBA from Harvard University, but he earned a political PhD from Grover Norquiests’ University of Neo-Con, born again or not.

So please save me the rhetoric; I’m Un-American, I’m Un-Patriotic, I’d never get these privileges in an other country, I’m an Un-Believer, I’m Godless, I don’t support the troops, I’m a liberal loving Democrat, I’m part of the liberal mass media mis-reporting facts, I'm a cut and runner. Do I hear the likes of a Karl Rove?

I told you perception is a wicked tool in the American physic, we’d rather believe God knows we're right than be right with God! To the extent of killing one another.

Posted by: John J | Oct 15, 2006 1:52:33 PM&nbsp

Here's a thought:

Prosecute the War instead of the President and his defense of our National Interests.

I think the bloggers in Chicago, many in the United States AND the radical terrorists in Iraq all have one thing in common: they want to have a Democratic House in 2008.

And in exchange for that petty objective for an intangble political power, they will totally devalue the lives, effort and results of US Soldiers and Taxpayers who have given their lives and spent Billions of United States Dollars repairing an infrastructure of civil works: running water, paved roads and schools, that were neglected by a Sunni Muslim tyrant (Saddam Hussien) all in an effort to establish peace, prosperity and democracy in Iraq and the Middle East.

Our Soldiers have been protecting those poor people in Iraq who thought that it was possible in their country to enjoy some of the basic freedoms that we consider entitlements in the United States.

I wish those who say it is a waste or a mistake to go into Iraq had to look those Iraqi people in the eyes when they say such garbage.

It is disgusting to read and hear all of the ridiculous arguments that support abandoning the people of Iraq, our Troops, our National Interests and our President.

Perhaps we should demonstrate a civil maturity in exercising our precious right to vote here in the United States. I wish the same zeal for Civil Rights in the United States were expressed by those same people for someone else in another land who had to sacrifice everything for the right to vote, including military protection by the United States Army as they walked into the polls and faced death when the wrong person saw their stained thumb.

Rest assured, those same Muslim terrorists who murdered hundreds and thousands in Iraq will exercise their right to terrorize and kill not only the Iraqis when the United States either leaves or fails to protect the free people of Iraq, but also those folks who enjoy those civl rights here in the United States.

Let's realize that we're fighting a War -- not each other -- and get about the business of doing it the way the United States does things -- the RIGHT way, regardles of who is in Congress.

Posted by: KSW | Oct 15, 2006 1:59:48 PM&nbsp

I recieved a email from Janet to Jared that was a nasy email you should be ashamed of yourself. The Facts she has or on the record everything there is true. Grow Up let real veterans talk not checken hawks who never served a day. You should your intelligence Sir by your post to her.

Posted by: Dale Peters | Oct 15, 2006 2:02:09 PM&nbsp

I was originally a supporter of this war, first for the humanitarian reason (Sadam and his officers were killing people mercilessly - Kurds, anyone who opposed him, etc.), and secondly I did think having a democratic governement where people could have rights and representation, and aspire to things (other than becoming a terorist) and having an accountable government - all would help the big picture in the war on terror.

However, we have created a nightmare over there. The sectarian violence is horrible, there are hundreds of innoent people being murdered each week (by death squads, etc.). The situation is bad and after 4 years it's only getting worse.

It's time to admit this and work on getting out. Take our troops out and put them in Afganistan - where the people responsible for 9/11 are taking over again - and get that region back to a prosperous society. A place where people can come from the poor areas and find work, and be part of progress - as opposed to finding sole purpose in a jihad.

But yes, time to rethink things Bush. Ever hear the term 'fight smarter not harder'?

- Tom

Posted by: Tom G | Oct 15, 2006 4:06:37 PM&nbsp

George W. Bush is the perfect example of his own scripted meaningless cliches, e.g.
Look what happens when you elect a mediocre governor with:
1. No experience in Internal or External Affairs.
2. Complete ignorance about history.
3. Delusions of grandeur because of his last name and upbringing.
4. Comtempt for our Laws, Institutions and Constitution.
5. An evil VP and a counselor who feed subliminal messages to look smart and tough.
6. A pathological obsession for Power and Money
7. A Congress and Senate that are like parents in denial about a bad son who gives them a lot of grief.
8. An ego way bigger than his brain.
9. A phobia for reality that's holding the country hostage.

You get the picture. It's time people wake up and reclaim America from the worst administration this country has ever had.

Posted by: Ed Strada | Oct 15, 2006 4:33:52 PM&nbsp

To those who emailed Janet she was just as hard on Clinton. But this is what Bush has done since he has been in office. Clinton was no where near this bad. Bush claims to support the troops and veterans. But is read what he did on the record behind America"s back. JD John look this is the truth its all in the record or Janet would never of post it on her site. She works for the VA and She tracks what is done and not done. There will be a new book out soon by a friend Illona about PTSD and other mental problems of veterans and the lack of care. Look you know we are at war but you have to take care of the people you send to fight it. And not lie to them by putting out a budget with everything Janet has listed in it. This is all the truth that you seem not to care about. Your only come back is to talk about Clinton his time is long since been over. Its now what the Country needs to focus on the truth not spin.

Posted by: Dale Peters | Oct 15, 2006 4:49:41 PM&nbsp

Comments are not posted immediately. We review them first in an effort to remove foul language, commercial messages, irrelevancies and unfair attacks. Thank you for your patience.